From:   Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To:       Secretary of the Navy 
 
Subj:    REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO   
 
 
Ref:     (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552 
 
Encl:   (1) DD Form 149  
 
1.  Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board), requesting that his naval record be corrected to remove multiple copies of Page 11 counseling statements dated 14 September 2016.   
                                              
2.  The Board, consisting of , reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 11 February 2021, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of the naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.   
 
3.  The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows: 
 
     a.  Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.   
 
     b.  Petitioner entered active duty with the Marine Corps in March 2006 with a preexisting tattoo on his left forearm.  Based on MARADMIN 029/10, Petitioner’s existing forearm tattoo was documented in his record via a Page 11 counselling statement on 14 December 2012. 
 
     c.  On 2 June 2016, the Marine Corps released MCBUL 1020 that amplified the existing tattoo policy and directed documentation of all tattoos not in compliance with the policy unless the tattoos were previously documented.  Petitioner was subsequently issued a Page 11 counselling statement on 14 September 2016 for the same left forearm tattoo that was documented in 2012.  A review of his record shows that three copies of the 14 September 2016 Page 11 are contained in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).   Petitioner argues that the existence of the 14 September 2016 counsellings may potentially cause his selection board briefer to become confused and incorrectly believe that Petitioner violated the Marine Corps tattoo policy after his original counselling in 2012.    
                            
 
CONCLUSION 
 
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board finds the existence of an error warranting relief.  Specifically, the Board concluded that the Marine Corps erroneously counselled Petitioner on 14 September 2016 for the same left forearm tattoo that was previously documented in his record in 2012.  MCBUL 1020 specifically excludes the counselling requirement for tattoos already documented in service member records.  Therefore, the Board concluded the 14 September 2016 Page 11 was not required and should be removed to avoid any potential for confusion at future selection boards.     
 
RECOMMENDATION 
 
In view of the above, the Board directs the following corrective action. 
 
Petitioner’s naval record be corrected by removing all copies of the Page 11 Administrative Remarks (1070) dated 14 September 2016 from his OMPF.     
 
4.  It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter. 
 
5.  Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulation, Section 723.6(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.